Piltdown Superman

Denizens of depths of the the secular science industry keep trying to buffalo the public into believing that Charles Darwin was right, and that there is no Creator — or that he is a bungler if indeed he does exist. It is in their best interests to deny, ignore, or downplay facts against evolution. Grant money. Atheists and other evolutionists also promote outdated and false information. Although vestigial organs  (also called vestigial structures, rudimentary, or useless) were used to validate evolution, they have been debunked. Yet Darwin's disciples continue to zombify them. After I took this picture* in Rosendale, it did not go well, as you see. One way of making a zombie out of the vestigial organ nonsense is to keep acting like it is a valid argument. It came about in the first place because those in medical science did not understand the functions of the organs, so they argued from ignorance and presupposed evolution (circular reasoning). Also, the fake drawings of Ernst Haec

It is one thing for scientists to make mistakes, but Darwin's acolytes are slow to correct them when the naturalism narrative is threatened. Indeed, several icons of evolution have been referenced on this site alone that continue unabated. One of these is the claim that the appendix is "vestigial". Neotinic atheists and many evolutionists are happy to let errors slide despite the oft-repeated mantra that "science is self-correcting". So-called vestigial structures/organs were supposedly unneeded leftovers from our evolutionary past, so they atrophied or became nonfunctional. Like the claim of "junk" DNA , evidence was hitched to the wagon of evolutionary presuppositions, and a passel of hubris was added to the load. All of these are assumptions based on worldviews, not conclusions based on scientific evidence. The hubris is that secularists did not understand DNA ( which had not been fully sequenced ), nor did they understand the functions of certain s

There are several things that are considered vestigial structures (or organs ) ,  which are essentially remnants of our alleged molecules-to-man evolutionary past. Part of this is because secular scientists presume Darwinism, and do not consider that the Master Engineer created organisms, and the parts therein, for specific purposes. Instead, they assume that if they cannot determine a purpose, then it must be leftover junk. Not hardly! Credit: Pixabay / StockSnap Evolutionists have embarrassed themselves and misled the public about the appendix , tonsils were routinely removed, parts of the genome that were not understood were called "junk" DNA , and so on. Also, wisdom teeth. Those have been removed many times, but it is often an unnecessary surgery. via GIPHY There can be complications, but I'll allow they are seldom life-threatening. But still, unnecessary surgeries are unethical — albeit profitable. As far as their putative evolutionary past — hang on, t

Many people have heard that they have appendicitis, so they need to have their appendix surgically removed. Fortunately, it's a common procedure and complications are rare . The thought of emergency surgery of any kind is rather alarming, though, I know the feeling. Darwinists had long designated the appendix as vestigial, a useless remnant from our alleged evolutionary past. This has been a major folly , especially since this very useful organ has been removed for no valid reason. Credit: Pixabay / sasint Evolutionists had written off the appendix as useless, so understanding of its usefulness to medical science was hindered by evolutionary thinking. Even so, they have wondered where it came from, and why so many different creatures have one, and why they are not all the same. Predictions from evolutionists have failed many times in this are and others, and the evidence actually shows that living things were designed by the Creator, and are not the product of evolution.

Purveyors of mold-to-monkey evolution will point to what they call vestigial structures as proof of their belief system, where the standard definition of "vestigial" is something that was useful in our evolutionary past, but is now completely (or almost completely) useless. This is based on circular reasoning and making assumptions: how do you know what happened in the distant past? One of the most common examples cited is the human appendix, which can be perfectly healthy but removed anyway, based on evolutionary assumptions. Jerry Coyne redefined the word : "A trait can be vestigial and functional at the same time. It is not vestigial because it’s functionless, but because it no longer performs the function for which it evolved ” (emphasis in original)". And he knows the original because...? Although the appendix was shown to be important to digestion , Evo Sith like Jerry Coyne,  Live Science , and others persist in the "it's vestigial" fal

As a child, did you ever play " Pin the Tail on the Donkey "? You blindfold the participants (one at a time), spin them a bit, then have them put a tail thing on a picture of a donkey that is attached to a wall or something. I wasn't too fond of that game. Darwinists often try to pin the tail on the human by claiming that sometimes people are born with "tails". (Sometimes they confuse "tail" with the tailbone, or coccyx, which is a part of normal human embryonic structure .) These people claim that these "tails" are leftover from our alleged evolutionary history. Now, wait a minute, old son. When someone says that we "evolved from monkeys", they risk the wrath of evolutionists who say that we didn't evolve from monkeys or apes, but that they diverged from a common ancestor way back yonder. But they want to claim we had tails, the "throwbacks" prove it. Lemurs have tails, and they're on the evolutionary tree, wh

One of the tired canards of evolution is that the whale has vestigial hind legs and a pelvic girdle. This means they are leftovers from its alleged (and preposterous) evolutionary past where it something flopped from the sea onto land, evolved, then turned around and evolved further into a whale . Yeah, that's science. People believe this, and promote it as if it could kill off belief in the Creator: Part of this guy's elephant hurling session. Click for larger. So-called vestigial organs have been an embarrassment to evolutionists. They declared various organs and such to be useless leftovers from an evolutionary past, and then (like "junk" DNA) uses have been found. So some are actually redefining the word "vestigial" to sidestep the issue. As usual, evolutionary thinking has hindered actual science. Things were declared useless, they were not studied. Creationists have always maintained, in the correct scientific attitude, that things have a

"Evolution is true because of vestigial organs!", claim the Autons of Evolution. These are supposedly remnants of evolution that have no function, but that is an outdated claim based on circular reasoning, arguing from ignorance — and wishful thinking. Some evolutionists even embarrass themselves by claiming that the human appendix is a vestigial organ (or "vestigial structure"), which is a long discredited claim .  In their efforts to hound creationists into believing that they're right, some proponents of microbes-to-microbiologist evolution are making the claim that the clavicle of dogs is also vestigial. But again, they are barking up the wrong tree. Creationists are proved right yet again. In comparison to human beings, dogs have a rather different shoulder design, and the same applies to many other carnivorous and hoofed animals too, such as and cats and horses. The shoulder bones appear somewhat disconnected from the rest of the skeleton an